Primefree sequences in the OEIS. A bad idea.

[Antti Karttunen]

N. J. A. Sloane wrote:

>Concerning this:
>
>
>Sequence An in Sloane's Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences
>contains no primes.
>
>THIS IS REALLY ill-defined!  There are two interpretations:
>A_n as visible in the current OEIS contains no primes
>or
>A_n when considered in full - meaning usually all infinitely
>many terms - contains no prime
>
>Only the second version is at all interesting, but I'm afraid
>it was the former that was calculated. Does anyone know?
>
>  
>
and Jud McCranie wrote:
At 11:00 PM 10/21/2005, franktaw at netscape.net wrote:

> > The next terms are 132,141,143,144,145,152,156,173,252 (if I did not 
> make a mistake).
> >There are no others up to 287; I was unable to determine whether 
> A000287 contains any primes,
> > partly because its definition is unclear.


 > Is 882 in the sequence?  What about 2967?  Or 3828?

Just for these reasons, I think these kind of sequences open
a big can of worms, even without any Cantorisms.
Next someone comes up with a sequence "those n for which sequence An
in OEIS contains no integers of the form 17k+-3". " or "... no integers with
palindromic (decimal) expansion." Would anybody like to edit and check 
these?


Terveisin,

Antti